Most Basic CAP Uniform for New Member

[Ford73Diesel]

On an interesting note, I have a ton of brand new old-style Coast Guard ODUs....

Why is it that anyone with a screen name like that (antdetroit) just jumped out and screamed "Coastie"? 

Still in the Detroit area?  Hit me with a PM and I can give you the low down on the squadrons in the area.

I caught that reference too. I always see invites in my D9 email for wallyball. Coupled with ANT Detroit it was not hard to figure out. Shoot me a PM, I know a guy who was stationed at ANT Detroit recently.

CGR member, CAP member (inactive, but renew my membership for some reason)

[AlphaSigOU]

You may want to try www.pilotshirts.com for pinpoint oxford white dress shirts with mitered pockets and epaulets. Just make sure to select the shirt without the wing holes and the velcroed top pocket flap! That's what I generally use for my G/W uniform, though I also have V/H Aviators.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Observing this thread, it seems to me that eventually the de facto kit for senior members is going to be the grey/white, for several reasons:

Cost.  Unless you get lucky at an Army/Navy (which I did; waist-length Air Force jacket for $25, I think), or are in a unit which gets them from ANG/AFRES/AFROTC, it's going to cost a lot more to get the AF uniform together.  Even if you look on Evilbay, there's no guarantee that what you may find is current issue; i.e., older shades of trousers and flight caps.

Convenience.  Again, unless you get lucky at the Army/Navy, have an MCSS near you (disclaimer: I do) or want to navigate the AAFES, it's easier to just go to the Goodwill/St. Vince's and get a white shirt and grey trousers a lot cheaper.  There is also very little standardisation with this kit (I don't call it a uniform, because it is not uniform)...as long as you've got a white shirt that can fit CAP epaulettes, grey slacks, black belt and shoes, there's really nothing to "standardise" on, and any type of blue business coat will do for the Realtor corporate setup, as long as you can stick a nameplate and CAP crest (with or without bog-awful pocket protector) on it.

Almost Anything Goes.  I have never personally witnessed anyone getting called on a uniform violation in the G/W kit...because, unless you're doing something obviously egregious (military ribbons/badges, blue nameplate, wearing AF flight cap), it's next to impossible to violate almost non-existent standards.  And, of course, no worries about H/W or facial hair.

(False) assumption of no Customs and Courtesies.  I have met so many CAP personnel who think that the only time you must render C&C's is in the AF uniform.

I think that, because of those factors, eventually most seniors will settle on the G/W over the AF uniform, if they haven't already.  I would be interested to see now, at year end 2013, how many of our members wear the G/W exclusively and have no plans to wear the AF uniform, even if they can meet the standards.

It wouldn't be such a bitter pill (for me) to swallow if a real uniform headgear (and the "CAP baseball cap" isn't) and service coat were authorised, and a blue civilian airline shirt replacing the white shirt.

This is a flight of fancy, but something like this East German officers' evening dress jacket would look a lot better than a "corporate" jacket, especially with CAP insignia, ribbons, etc. authorised.



It's grey, it's got a look somewhere in between military and civilian, and it looks good.

Of course, I know I'm in a minority of one on any changes to the corporate uniforms.

[Luis R. Ramos]

That cut was popular with another German about 75 years ago.

See http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Adolf_Hitler_Wax_Statue_in_Madame_Tussauds_London.jpg

Flyer

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

That cut was popular with another German about 75 years ago.

See http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Adolf_Hitler_Wax_Statue_in_Madame_Tussauds_London.jpg

Flyer

The only thing in common is the colour.  Period.

[Panache]

That cut was popular with another German about 75 years ago.

See http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Adolf_Hitler_Wax_Statue_in_Madame_Tussauds_London.jpg

Eh.  Many military or military-style uniforms share common themes. 

[Panache]

"Hey, guys, did you see the G/W kit in the new 39-1?"

[SARDOC]

I always think of Starship Troopers everytime someone talks about grey uniforms

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rock_biologist/1333500605/#

[Panache]

Would you like to know more?

[PHall]

Observing this thread, it seems to me that eventually the de facto kit for senior members is going to be the grey/white, for several reasons:

Cost.  Unless you get lucky at an Army/Navy (which I did; waist-length Air Force jacket for $25, I think), or are in a unit which gets them from ANG/AFRES/AFROTC, it's going to cost a lot more to get the AF uniform together.  Even if you look on Evilbay, there's no guarantee that what you may find is current issue; i.e., older shades of trousers and flight caps.

Convenience.  Again, unless you get lucky at the Army/Navy, have an MCSS near you (disclaimer: I do) or want to navigate the AAFES, it's easier to just go to the Goodwill/St. Vince's and get a white shirt and grey trousers a lot cheaper.  There is also very little standardisation with this kit (I don't call it a uniform, because it is not uniform)...as long as you've got a white shirt that can fit CAP epaulettes, grey slacks, black belt and shoes, there's really nothing to "standardise" on, and any type of blue business coat will do for the Realtor corporate setup, as long as you can stick a nameplate and CAP crest (with or without bog-awful pocket protector) on it.

Almost Anything Goes.  I have never personally witnessed anyone getting called on a uniform violation in the G/W kit...because, unless you're doing something obviously egregious (military ribbons/badges, blue nameplate, wearing AF flight cap), it's next to impossible to violate almost non-existent standards.  And, of course, no worries about H/W or facial hair.

(False) assumption of no Customs and Courtesies.  I have met so many CAP personnel who think that the only time you must render C&C's is in the AF uniform.

I think that, because of those factors, eventually most seniors will settle on the G/W over the AF uniform, if they haven't already.  I would be interested to see now, at year end 2013, how many of our members wear the G/W exclusively and have no plans to wear the AF uniform, even if they can meet the standards.

It wouldn't be such a bitter pill (for me) to swallow if a real uniform headgear (and the "CAP baseball cap" isn't) and service coat were authorised, and a blue civilian airline shirt replacing the white shirt.

This is a flight of fancy, but something like this East German officers' evening dress jacket would look a lot better than a "corporate" jacket, especially with CAP insignia, ribbons, etc. authorised.



It's grey, it's got a look somewhere in between military and civilian, and it looks good.

Of course, I know I'm in a minority of one on any changes to the corporate uniforms.

Cyborg, you never give up, do ya? 

Do yourself a favor and drop it. All you're doing is raising your blood pressure, again.

[Private Investigator]

Would you like to know more?

That is so funny even Santa laughed, ho, ho, ho   :clap:

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Cyborg, you never give up, do ya? 

Do yourself a favor and drop it. All you're doing is raising your blood pressure, again.

My blood pressure is quite within standards, according to my last doctor's visit.  I assure you I am quite serene.

You, good sir, seem to be the one who gets their knickers in a twist when I mention any changes to the CAP/corporate uniform.  I do not see you doing that with anyone else, and I know others have suggested changes.

In my original post, the only changes suggested were a service coat and cap of some sort.  The rest was nothing but an analysis, based solely on my opinion, which I ask no-one else to agree with, of why I believe the G/W kit will eventually overtake the AF uniform among CAP senior members.

So which part am I to "drop?"  Expressing an opinion?  Unless I violate the TOS, that is not going to happen.

I believe there is a function allowing CT posters to "ignore" the posts of another poster.  If my posts cause you so much annoyance, may I suggest you use that?

Here's hoping you and yours had a blessed Christmas.

[VNY]

I always think of Starship Troopers everytime someone talks about grey uniforms

Battlestar Galactica uniforms were grey too - and I'm pretty sure they follow the "Low Light" rule too.

[Fubar]

Observing this thread, it seems to me that eventually the de facto kit for senior members is going to be the grey/white, for several reasons:

Observing my wing, we already have a de facto uniform - the polo with grey pants. I suspect for many of the same reasons you quote for the aviator - cost, ease of maintenance, and the lack of concern with military customs.

I get that CAPM 39-1 prescribes a minimum uniform that members must own, however I think it's inappropriate to waste a volunteer's money. If the member has no desire to wear the aviator/blues uniforms and they participate at a squadron that has no issues with members wearing the polo to meetings, then there's your de facto minimum uniform.

Now if a member finds him or herself joining a squadron that likes to designate UODs and send seniors home in the wrong uniform, then either pony up for the appropriate uniforms or find a different squadron that's more align with your interests.

[Luis R. Ramos]

This is again what we discuss is a problem in CAP. Members choosing to interpret regulations. You start with choosing to ignore a uniform, after you signed a membership application that stated you would follow regulations and orders.

Which regulation will you violate next, the one that states you have to be a pilot to fly CAP aircraft?

Flyer

[Eclipse]

Observing my wing, we already have a de facto uniform - the polo with grey pants. I suspect for many of the same reasons you quote for the aviator - cost, ease of maintenance, and the lack of concern with military customs.

I believe terms you were actually looking for are "laziness" and "apathy".

I get that CAPM 39-1 prescribes a minimum uniform that members must own, however I think it's inappropriate to waste a volunteer's money. If the member has no desire to wear the aviator/blues uniforms and they participate at a squadron that has no issues with members wearing the polo to meetings, then there's your de facto minimum uniform.[/qupte]
No, they join an organization which has no such requirement.

Now if a member finds him or herself joining a squadron that likes to designate UODs and send seniors home in the wrong uniform, then either pony up for the appropriate uniforms or find a different squadron that's more align with your interests.

The fact that members believe a uniform should "align with their interests" sums up this issue nicely.

[Panache]

This is again what we discuss is a problem in CAP. Members choosing to interpret regulations. You start with choosing to ignore a uniform, after you signed a membership application that stated you would follow regulations and orders.

Which regulation will you violate next, the one that states you have to be a pilot to fly CAP aircraft?

Not owning a set of G/W or AF Blues hasn't, to the best of my knowledge, gotten anybody killed.

Observing my wing, we already have a de facto uniform - the polo with grey pants. I suspect for many of the same reasons you quote for the aviator - cost, ease of maintenance, and the lack of concern with military customs.

I believe terms you were actually looking for are "laziness" and "apathy".

Yet he speaks the truth.  There are a significant number of Squadrons out there where, for SM's, the default uniform is the polos-and-gray pants option.

The fact that members believe a uniform should "align with their interests" sums up this issue nicely.

So?  Again, we're a volunteer organization.  If somebody wants to put in their time and effort, but really has no desire to wear a uniform other then the polo, so what?  I would rather a member find a squadron they're compatible with than they aren't.

[abdsp51]

So we basically teach cadets to bounce from place to place until they get what they want?  Sorry but there are countless organizations who have some type of uniform and have dues that are required to be paid to participate.  Sorry but if you don't want to play by the rules and obtain what is required then we don't need you.

Sorry but 39-1 is clear on the min required uniform and that is what should be obtained, especially by SMs who are supposed to be setting the example and standard. If the unit CC wants to say that the UOD is the polo fine and dandy but it is not the required minimum uniform, and it should not be the goto uniform for a member because they don't want to spend the money.  And if a unit is telling a prospective member that all that is required is the polo they are wrong.

With in the past year within my unit here it has gone to most of the SMs in polo daily to majority of them in either AF or Corp equivalent for our meetings, and there was very little resistance.

[Panache]

So we basically teach cadets to bounce from place to place until they get what they want?

Cadets and SM's are two different beasts.  And we're constantly telling prospective new members to shop around to find a squadron that is a fit for them.  So, should we amend that advice to "except for uniforms, because 39-1 is sacrament, unlike all the other outdated or poorly written regs we all ignore on a regular basis to get the mission done?"

Now, everybody may commence with calling me out for my heresy, even if it's true.

[a2capt]

Ya'll will never win the polo vs. 39-1 vs. basic minimum uniform bit.